Bachmann review of outstanding models

[wombatofludham]

I do wonder if the 166s have been cancelled to make use of the forthcoming Class 158 chassis? Perhaps rather than issue a non-DCC version now they are waiting to launch a new model on the new chassis. They are spreading their wings to the Bristol area, as well as Cardiff and the South Coast, so would probably benefit from a continued presence in the catalogue if they can be upgraded using the new 158 chassis.

[YesTor]

Hmmmm, while the 90 looks generally nice, there is one thing that does scream quite loudly (aside from the pantograph gimmickery) and that's moulded handrails...

 

Really... WHY?!

 

Arrrrrrgh!  

[YesTor]

I might have to purchase one of the cranes though as they do look exceptional, even though they are nowhere near my modelling era. 

[Porcy Mane]

I never thought I would find myself saying this of the RTR boys but I have to declare, I'm highly impressed. I can see many a grown man  (and woman) wasting away a few hours "playing" with the breakdown crane despite it not looking the least bit toy like.

 

I'm relieved I've modelled a short bunkered version of the J72. I'm pretty sure Bachmann will  bring out an example of the BR/NER liveried Newcastle/York pilot and with tampo printing being what it is nowadays even the best pro painter will probably be pushed to better that particular complex livery. I might just have to get a couple to fit over some High Level Chassis.

They also travelled as far as East Anglia, North Wales & Scotland.

 

I haven't got a clue about electrics but I'd be interested to see the size of the servo. I can think of a few good uses that could be put to.

 

Good to see a P4 modeller on the video. I hope he made sure there was enough room under the J72 splashers to fit P4 wheelsets?

 

Another thing I found myself being impressed with in the video, was the amount of double chins on display . Suddenly I don't feel so alone!  

 

P

Edited January 3, 2018 by Porcy Mane

[ejstubbs]

I must admit to being a mite disappointed that the non-split-chassis parallel boiler Royal Scot has been put on the back burner.  I've got one of Bachmann's modern Patriot models (Duke of Sutherland) and I've had a hankering for a parallel boiler Scot for some time but, although I don't use DCC, the general bad press that the split chassis seems to get has put me off.  I'm not aware of another RTR offering made to anything like current standards being available.  Oh well, just have to keep waiting I suppose...

[centraltrains]

 

There are, however, a few models in the current catalogue for which the present economic conditions are not favourable, so we are removing these items from the range for the foreseeable future. 

 

The items are:

• The Class 166 models (Catalogue numbers 31-029 GWR and 31-025A Network SouthEast liveries)

 

 

Nooooooooooooo!

 

 

"David Haarhaus, Managing Director, Bachmann Europe said today “Whilst it is frustrating for ourselves, and no doubt disappointing for our consumers, we feel the right and proper decisions have been made. These suspended subjects may well become Branchline models in the future, and I am confident that our resources are now allocated to more appropriate projects, many of which shall remain unannounced until prototype stage, examples of which can be found in our forthcoming 2018 catalogues.”

 

Hinting at allowing 165s with new tooling maybe? 

Edited January 3, 2018 by centraltrains

[daltonparva]

I must admit to being a mite disappointed that the non-split-chassis parallel boiler Royal Scot has been put on the back burner. I've got one of Bachmann's modern Patriot models (Duke of Sutherland) and I've had a hankering for a parallel boiler Scot for some time but, although I don't use DCC, the general bad press that the split chassis seems to get has put me off. I'm not aware of another RTR offering made to anything like current standards being available. Oh well, just have to keep waiting I suppose...

So am I. I think I have 8 or 9 LMS red Scots, and years ago I converted one for DCC sound with the same plug and socket arrangement that Bachmann and Hornby both use. When the chassis upgrade was anounced I thought I'll wait and work my way through chassis swaps (as I have with 6 earlier Jubilees). I have 6 sound chips waiting for the Scots. I am pigged off now, as besides the work involved with the old chassis, they do not come up to scratch with everything else I own. If it wasn't for the very undersized cylinders I might put up with them, and I can't use the Jubilee or Patriot chassis, as wrong cylinders and wheel balance weights. Crap start to new year.

Edited January 3, 2018 by daltonparva

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

...while the 90 looks generally nice, there is one thing that does scream quite loudly (aside from the pantograph gimmickry) and that's moulded handrails...

 

This is a persistent problem with RTR in my opinion, the 'feature mix'. Personally I want correct exterior representation of all the detail that can be achieved commercially in 4mm and a competent mechanism above all else. The stuff that is easily perceived with the model in action on the layout. Gimmicks like painted interior detail fit, lights, sound, smoke, moving doodads, opening doors; don't want any of that. Adds cost for no benefit.

 

Moulded handrails are a deal breaker in my book. Either do them with separately fitted parts, or leave them off the model entirely. Removing moulded detail to fit what should have been used results in damage to paintwork; and it is the paintwork which is a large part of the attraction of RTR. With a blank surface to start from, a few neatly drilled holes enables DIY detail fit to be trouble free. Am I alone in feeling this is way the better option?

[John Tomlinson]

This is a persistent problem with RTR in my opinion, the 'feature mix'. Personally I want correct exterior representation of all the detail that can be achieved commercially in 4mm and a competent mechanism above all else. The stuff that is easily perceived with the model in action on the layout. Gimmicks like painted interior detail fit, lights, sound, smoke, moving doodads, opening doors; don't want any of that. Adds cost for no benefit.

 

Moulded handrails are a deal breaker in my book. Either do them with separately fitted parts, or leave them off the model entirely. Removing moulded detail to fit what should have been used results in damage to paintwork; and it is the paintwork which is a large part of the attraction of RTR. With a blank surface to start from, a few neatly drilled holes enables DIY detail fit to be trouble free. Am I alone in feeling this is way the better option?

 

No you aren't alone, and I couldn't agree more.

 

Moulded items are a disaster if you want to replace them as you're then letting yourself in for a respray. Or rather in my case, keeping my money for something else!

 

I find it staggering that folk who would consider themselves "modellers" get stroppy at the prospect of fitting a few sprues of add on parts, which is the obvious answer to the problem.

 

John.

[it's-er]

"Am I alone in feeling this is way the better option?" 34C above

 

I suspect you are in a minority. We got separately fitted parts on many models in recent years - locomotives, coaches and wagons - and folk commented that they were fragile and exposed, and could easily be knocked off. I think this was particularly so with coaches. I was astonished that the door handles on Hornby's Gresley noncorridor stock, for example, is separately fitted.

 

Bachmann went back to moulded handrails on some recent coaching stock (was it the Birdcages?) and it is only by looking very closely that you could tell they aren't separately applied.

 

It probably comes down to how well it is done - if you can only see the difference on close inspection, I think most of us will be happy with moulded handrails.

 

John Storey

Edited January 3, 2018 by it's-er

[coachmann]

As for the non-availability of a parallel boiler LMS 'Scot', surely cheap bodies can be bought on Ebay and the body modified to fit on a Hornby Rebuilt Scot chassis. Another way is to fit the parallel body on a Bachmann Jubilee chassis; that way you also get to use the Bachmann Tender (its better than Hornby's).

Edited January 3, 2018 by coachmann

[Mike Storey]

I really hope the 2 HAP and 4 BEP are still in the pipeline and not affected by this. I can see no mention of them in any of the press releases going back six months, but Andy kindly confirmed a few weeks ago that they were in CAD. The 2 HAP was last reported as being in CAD, but is not shown on the list above now, although it and the 4 BEP are still shown on their website (as "On Order") as of today, but then, so too is the Class 166.....

[Steven B]

Were there updates on the N Gauge and 009 models?

 

 

Steven B

[Andy Y]

The announcement relates to two items; nothing else. Everything else is proceeding and I'll be able to give updates as to where they are in the process when we've got the information after next week's briefings.

[Pint of Adnams]

 

Bachmann REVIEW OF OUTSTANDING MODELS

 

There are, however, a few models in the current catalogue for which the present economic conditions are not favourable, so we are removing these items from the range for the foreseeable future. 

 

The items are:

• The new DCC compatible chassis for the Parallel Boiler Royal Scot Class 4-6-0 (Catalogue numbers 31-285 LMS crimson,  31-286 BR black and 31-287 in BR green)

• The Class 166 models (Catalogue numbers 31-029 GWR and 31-025A Network SouthEast liveries)

 

David Haarhaus, Managing Director, Bachmann Europe said today “Whilst it is frustrating for ourselves, and no doubt disappointing for our consumers, we feel the right and proper decisions have been made.

 

Obviously Andy Y's thread title is misleading - these are not 'outstanding' in the way John Travolta would say it but 'overdue' and now two are about to be seriously 'underdone'.

Edited January 3, 2018 by Pint of Adnams

[rob D2]

Surprised they have binned the GWR 166, everything that is in that manky green seems to sell out......I suspect the reason may have revolved around the fact the RRP would have been higher than what most would be willing to pay for a long in the tooth moulding which IIrC wasn’t DCC ready

Edited January 3, 2018 by rob D2

[adb968008]

Don’t forget there’s a GWR class 150/2 still to come.

[YesTor]

This is a persistent problem with RTR in my opinion, the 'feature mix'. Personally I want correct exterior representation of all the detail that can be achieved commercially in 4mm and a competent mechanism above all else. The stuff that is easily perceived with the model in action on the layout. Gimmicks like painted interior detail fit, lights, sound, smoke, moving doodads, opening doors; don't want any of that. Adds cost for no benefit.

 

Moulded handrails are a deal breaker in my book. Either do them with separately fitted parts, or leave them off the model entirely. Removing moulded detail to fit what should have been used results in damage to paintwork; and it is the paintwork which is a large part of the attraction of RTR. With a blank surface to start from, a few neatly drilled holes enables DIY detail fit to be trouble free. Am I alone in feeling this is way the better option?

 

I could not agree more.  Sound and interior lights are all options that can (relatively) easily be fitted after purchase if the buyer so wishes.  And to be honest, although I can appreciate the short-term 'wow' factor of electronic pantograph and rotating buffers, well, they really are no more than that, ie. "short-term wow" - there's only so many times you can watch your buffers swivel before the novelty wears off surely?  However, carving off recessed moulded handrails will effectively destroy the outer finish of the model.  I really fail to understand this approach.  I hate to sound negative, but although the Class 90 does indeed look very nice otherwise it's the small details that make the ultimate difference.  We had proper handrails on the Class 85 and in fact all diesels since about the 1990s, but not now in 2018?  Sad to say it is also things like this that are deal-breakers for me too.  It really does appear that Bachmann are plumping for short-term gimmickry above maximum fidelity.  I have to say it smells a tad of the "design clever" (or indeed not-so clever) approach.  Bizarre, truly bizarre.

Edited January 3, 2018 by YesTor

[darren01]

No you aren't alone, and I couldn't agree more.

 

Moulded items are a disaster if you want to replace them as you're then letting yourself in for a respray. Or rather in my case, keeping my money for something else!

 

I find it staggering that folk who would consider themselves "modellers" get stroppy at the prospect of fitting a few sprues of add on parts, which is the obvious answer to the problem.

 

John.

I to do not understand why they can not give you them to put on, they did it with the 25, the other thing is why do they never give you a price for the model before they hit the shops, Hornby give you the price so you know what to save for.

[159220]

Glad the GWR 166 has been dropped, as the tooling is woefully below the standard expected today.

Surprised the 170 and 171 have not been dropped too.

One suspects, the chassis in development for the 158 (and 117) shall lead onto re-tooled 166s and 170s in the future, securing orders from me. Alas I have held off ordering the GWR 166 and Southern 171 due to suspicions a re-tool is on the cards.

 

I agree with the comment, a 165 would be welcomed too. These are going to be well spread units now, from Cardiff to Brighton.

[Dunsignalling]

I to do not understand why they can not give you them to put on, they did it with the 25, the other thing is why do they never give you a price for the model before they hit the shops, Hornby give you the price so you know what to save for.

Presumably because Hornby's release dates are within the operational range of a Mk.1 Crystal Ball and Bachmann's aren't............

Edited January 3, 2018 by Dunsignalling

[Steamport Southport]

I could not agree more.  Sound and interior lights are all options that can (relatively) easily be fitted after purchase if the buyer so wishes.  And to be honest, although I can appreciate the short-term 'wow' factor of electronic pantograph and rotating buffers, well, they really are no more than that, ie. "short-term wow" - there's only so many times you can watch your buffers swivel before the novelty wears off surely?  However, carving off recessed moulded handrails will effectively destroy the outer finish of the model.  I really fail to understand this approach.  I hate to sound negative, but although the Class 90 does indeed look very nice otherwise it's the small details that make the ultimate difference.  We had proper handrails on the Class 85 and in fact all diesels since about the 1990s, but not now in 2018?  Sad to say it is also things like this that are deal-breakers for me too.  It really does appear that Bachmann are plumping for short-term gimmickry above maximum fidelity.  I have to say it smells a tad of the "design clever" (or indeed not-so clever) approach.  Bizarre, truly bizarre.

 

Rotating buffers?

 

If you mean sprung buffers, then they aren't a gimmick to many of us, they are a necessity. Not all of us use tension lock couplings.

 

 

Jason

[Silver Sidelines]

Hello EJ

 

Perhaps I am easily pleased.

 

... the general bad press that the split chassis seems to get has put me off. .....

For Christmas I bought myself a split chassis Jubilee from the 1990s. Less than £50 and possibly even more fun than Sir William at £150 or was it £200.

 

 

Ray

Edited January 3, 2018 by Silver Sidelines

[Steamport Southport]

The buffers on buckeye fitted class 90s rotate from the "long" to "short" position.

 

If the buckeye is in the raised position the buffers will be turned 90°.

 

Is that what Yes Tor meant? I never knew that.

 

 

I don't know about Class 90s. Even though I like electrics they are too modern for me. 

 

 

 

 

Jason

[Dunsignalling]

Hello EJ

 

Perhaps I am easily pleased.

 

 

For Christmas I bought myself a split chassis Jubilee from the 1990s. Less than £50 and possibly even more fun than Sir William at £150 or was it £200.

 

 

Ray

Always supposing you can get a Sir William at all - I was told earlier today that only a third of the intended run has actually been produced - shades of Exeter ?

 

John